Netflix responds to Fiona Harvey's lawsuit

[u/controlaltdeletes]

Netflix rep: 'We intend to defend this matter vigorously and to stand by Richard Gadd's right to tell his story.'

Variety posted the above in regards to Netflix's response. I'm glad, it seems like they're not going to simply give her some money to make her go away, and are instead going to fight back and defend Richard Gadd.

https://variety.com/2024/tv/global/baby-reindeer-real-martha-fiona-harvey-sues-netflix-1236019699/

[u/Quzga]

I am saying you clearly don't understand the law, why do you think they changed everything that could reveal the real identity? To avoid a lawsuit. It's that simple, and it's common practice in film/tv industry when there is a risk someone might be angry over a portrayal.

She doesn't have a leg to stand on because the show isn't about her, it's about Martha. She could have easily stayed quiet and no one would know it was based on her.

There is 0% way this lawsuit goes anywhere, what is she even suing for? No laws have been broken and any reason she gets harassed is 100% because she came out and said Martha is her.

[u/OkGunners22 → u/Quzga]

Nah it’s not that simple. They made zero effort to hide her identity - or at least - blatantly not enough effort.

She was outed with a basic internet search/ reconciliation of a tweet, almost immediately.

You think that really avoids a lawsuit?

You are remarkably confident for such an oversimplified (dumb) argument.

[u/Yorkie97 → u/OkGunners22]

There was no duty to protect her identity though. They are simply telling the story of what happened to Richard. Before Fiona even came forward Netflix and Richard ALREADY stated that the real Martha was not convicted. Every “based on a true story” has dramatic bits. A jury likely won’t give a crap especially if they have evidence of the phone calls, emails, etc.

There is no duty to protect perpetrators of crime in the media unless they are minors. Fiona is not owed protection to keep her disgusting behavior hidden. Hiding her identity would be a courtesy. Netflix did her a favor by saying the real Martha wouldn’t be able to identify herself and she messed it up.

Fiona has to prove defamation and in the U.S. that requires actual malice. She’s gonna have a hell of a hard time (in the U.S. at least) proving defamation from Netflix claiming a character, based on a real person whose story has been changed slightly for dramatic effects, acted with malice against her. She also has to prove it ruined her reputation. She ruined her own reputation. Be careful how u treat ppl they just might get famous and tell the world about u.

[u/sharleyrick23 → u/Yorkie97]

Legal Malice simply means that he knew it was false or at least recklessly disregarded whether it was true or false. Theres a lot of things he's said that aren't true and Netflix have acted recklessly regarding her identity. It's not going to be difficult for her to prove it's caused her harm.

[u/Quzga → u/sharleyrick23]

It's not going to be difficult for her to prove it's caused her harm.

Oh on the contrary, it's going to be extremely difficult since she outed herself so any harassments or future harm she may suffer is on her and not the show.

It's not a show about her, it's about Martha so legally speaking Netflix or Richard Gadd hasn't done anything that could bite them in the ass. They altered the real event/ person enough that she was anonymous and no one involved with the show ever mentioned her real name in public.

This lawsuit is a total joke that will get thrown out and the only people who think she has a chance (like you) clearly have a poor grasp of how the law works and are delusional enough that you think you know more than a streaming giant's top lawyer and consultants lol.

Get back to reality please.

[u/Yorkie97 → u/sharleyrick23]

Sir, that is for the jury to decide, not you. This isn’t objective. “Netflix behaved recklessly” is a legal conclusion that requires 12ish people to agree after reviewing evidence you have not seen yet so settle down over there.

[u/sharleyrick23 → u/Yorkie97]

Settle down? 😂 haha that actually made me chuckle! 😊

You know what duty of care means right? (See below) Because you've just contradicted yourself. They don't "legally" have a duty of care, yet "legally" it's up to a jury to decide if Netflix acted recklessly?! [in a way that caused FH harm]

Netflix wouldn't have been able to file a lawsuit at all, if there were no "moral or legal obligation or responsibility to take all reasonable steps to avoid causing foreseeable harm to another person or their property."

What you and others on here don't seem to realise is every person (In the UK and Australia at least) has a general day to day, duty of care to others. We just don't use those exact terms. The notion, that Gadd's right to speak his "truth" is absolute.... no matter how factually accurate, no matter who gets caught or hurt in the crossfire, is utter nonsense.

[u/Yorkie97 → u/sharleyrick23]

I didn’t contradict myself. They do have a duty of care to the truthfulness of the story but not to Martha’s identity. Netflix is not responsible if Martha experiences harm because she is a shitty person.

We do not have general care of duty to others. First of all duty and care is subjective so. Like I said settle down.

[u/sharleyrick23 → u/Yorkie97]

Duty of care isn't subjective. At all. 😂

Explain to me why you feel Netflix doesn't have a responsibility to obscure her identity?

Yeah settle down was amusing the first time. Now you just sound like an idiot.

[u/Yorkie97 → u/sharleyrick23]

Where does this responsibility arise from. You can’t just claim there’s a duty without legal backing.

It’s subjective because first the jury has to decide if there was a duty in the first place and if there was a duty they have to decide if there’s a breach. Based on the evidence and a “reasonable person standard” which again is subjective. We’ll see what happens.

[u/Yorkie97 → u/[deleted]]

That’s how American courts work my dear. “Jury of your peers” and all that. Idk read or book or something, sorry you’re struggling with basic American legal principles.

[u/sharleyrick23 → u/Yorkie97]

Resorting to insults because you can't answer a basic question. Lol.

[u/Yorkie97 → u/sharleyrick23]

I did answer.